QB Grades Through Week 6 Per PFF

[Hapless Bills Fan]

4 minutes ago, Bangarang said:

I don’t conflate the two actually.

 

 

My apologies.  A number of people reading your posts for standard English usage appear to derive the impression that you conflate the two.

[JOE IN HAMPTON ROADS]

Its official!!!  JA>Cam Newton

 

[Bangarang]

7 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

My apologies.  A number of people reading your posts for standard English usage appear to derive the impression that you conflate the two.

Are these the same people that consider QB rating a controversial stat or the ones that hate on PFF in one thread but accept their conclusion in another when it’s what they want to hear?

 

Edited October 18, 2019 by Bangarang

[whatdrought]

Based on this list, we’re trading Allen for Marcus Mariota straight up. Major coup for Beane. 

 

 

 

Allen hasn’t been perfect, but I must be missing something that dictates he’s bottom 5 in the league while Baker Mayfield is top 15... 

Edited October 18, 2019 by whatdrought

[Thurman#1]

2 hours ago, WideNine said:

 

Not convinced, but to each their own.

 

Their opinion is just that, once you get down to the subjective interpretations of things like "accurate pass".

 

It is hard enough to get 3 people watching the same replay in slow motion to agree on what they are seeing. That is where subjective bias comes into play and we know where they and some others stand in regards to Allen.

 

It is not like their opinion really matters, it is our coaches and who they feel gives this team the best chance to win.

 

 

 

Sure, maybe two or three percent of plays will be right on the line, as far as accurate. Hard to call. The vast majority, though, could be agreed on by most reasonable people.

 

And nearly every NFL team buys PFF's data. They wouldn't do that if PFF wasn't damn good at what they do.

Edited October 18, 2019 by Thurman#1

[Buffalo Junction]

3 hours ago, berg1029 said:

According to PFF.. Devlin Hodges is better than Josh Allen?  WHAT?

 

I don't get really caught up in these rankings, but come on.  The guy threw for like 100 yards in a full game... pretty much all of which was to running backs.  

He gets bonus points for gold embroidered duck calling championship waders. 

[Stank_Nasty]

I actually think it’s a tool in the toolbox and I find their rankings interesting but shouldn’t taken too seriously. 
 

Going into last week they had a 1-4 steelers squad ranked 4 slots higher than our bills at 4-1..... that’s absolutely ABSURD 

[SCBills]

Joe Flacco looking every bit of his ranking 11 spots ahead of JA tonight.  

 

I honestly don’t mind these rankings.  They’re certainly useful as a metric.  I’m sure if Josh cuts down on the turnovers and connects on a deep pass every now and then, he will make a huge jump up this list.  

[JESSEFEFFER]

4 hours ago, Scott7975 said:

Josh Allen only has like a 42% completions 1 TD 2INTs versus the Blitz, going into the Pats game.  I'm sure that has a lot to do with his low ranking.

If he escapes the pressure and throws it away it hurts his passer rating.  We know he has rolled to the right and thrown some of his worst ints.  THAT really hurts his passer rating.  If he'd just take a bunch of sacks like Flacco did tonight, his passer rating suffers not a bit.

Edited October 18, 2019 by JESSEFEFFER

[JESSEFEFFER]

Thanks in part to the Bills defense Josh has looked more effective than every QB they faced this year. Yet they are all ranked higher on the year.  Maybe that's got our view skewed.

[Johnnycage46]

2 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

PFF is good. Not perfect, of course, but they're very good, and they don't tailor the stats to what they want to find.

 

Now, do the watchers find their perceptions are interfered with somewhat by their preconceptions. Yup. Same as every single human being in the history of history, but PFF still does a good job.

What exactly are you basing this take on?

[Boatdrinks]

I’d like to see Allen start making better plays vs the blitz. It’s not the be -all end -all, but it’s important and a good way to make teams think twice about blitzing. They will continue until you beat it, to be certain. The PFF rankings mean jack squat, good or bad. 

[Malazan]

1 hour ago, Bangarang said:

Are these the same people that consider QB rating a controversial stat or the ones that hate on PFF in one thread but accept their conclusion in another when it’s what they want to hear?

 

 

Why did you describe yourself like your someone else?

[Thurman#1]

 

 

1 hour ago, whatdrought said:

Based on this list, we’re trading Allen for Marcus Mariota straight up. Major coup for Beane. 

 

 

NO, based on this, we're trading straight up ... based only on how people have played the last few weeks. And nobody would make trades based only on that. PFF doesn't throw in very very obvious stuff like the fact that Allen has a major excuse for problems that Mariota doesn't have in that Allen has played - what? 17 games? Plus salary, when someone will get a 2nd contract ... there are thousands of other factors.

 

Nobody would base trades on only this. PFF is only talking about effectiveness so far this season.

Edited October 18, 2019 by Thurman#1

[Thurman#1]

 

21 minutes ago, Johnnycage46 said:

What exactly are you basing this take on?

 

 

Among other things, that nearly all NFL teams buy PFF data. The reason they do so is that they value it.

[RememberTheRockpile]

 

19 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

Among other things, that nearly all NFL teams buy PFF data. The reason they do so is that they value it.

 

Why do you assume that the highly subjective crap they put out for public consumption bear any resemblance to the data products they sell to the NFL or college teams?  If I am running a multi billion dollar company and am contracting out analytical analysis to another company I am sure as hell going to require a NDA that keeps the analysis/methods proprietary and define in detail what analysis I need done. The assumption that what they put out for public consumption is the same data products they sell to NFL or major college programs is extremely naive.  

[WideNine]

2 hours ago, Bangarang said:

Are these the same people that consider QB rating a controversial stat or the ones that hate on PFF in one thread but accept their conclusion in another when it’s what they want to hear?

 

 

I would not care if PFF had Allen at the top their QBR - just as meaningless as if they had him dragging the bottom.

 

I just trust my eyes when it comes to whether Allen, a QB that I thought was a very raw but talented prospect needing about 2 years just to get up to speed with more polished draft prospects with some time sitting behind a veteran, is trending in the right direction after being thrown into the fire. That is all I am looking for and it works for me.

 

Just for fun (because it is funny for us anachronistic antagonists of those in love with their arithmetic) just look at the Wikipedia comments about the long and skeptical journey of Total QBR and yes, I know I cherry-picked the funny comments.

 

"Unlike the NFL passer rating, ESPN has not yet been forthcoming on the exact specific formulas and procedures to calculate QBR.^[7] The proprietary, complex methodology spans some 10,000 lines of code.^[8] In an interview with San Diego's XX Sports Radio, San Diego Chargers quarterback Philip Rivers seemed baffled by the ratings, which put him ninth overall in its metrics for the 2010 season, saying "I still don't get it. I think it's more complicated now"

 

"Further criticism of QBR was brought about when, before some tinkering with the equation of QBR, Steelers quarterback Charlie Batch had the greatest individual game ever evaluated by QBR. Batch threw for 186 yards with two interceptions in the game"

 

"Further controversy erupted when the Total QBR system gave the Denver Broncos' Tim Tebow a higher rating than the Green Bay Packers' Aaron Rodgers in their respective Week 5 contests in 2011. Noting that Rodgers completed 26 of 39 passes for 396 yards and two touchdowns in a win over the Atlanta Falcons, while Tebow completed four of 10 passes for 79 yards and a touchdown, and six rushes for 38 yards and a touchdown, in a loss to the San Diego Chargers."

 

"In a more recent example, a game played on September 24, 2017, Alex Smith of Kansas City Chiefs received an inexplicable QBR of 7.8, half as much as the equally-bad QBR of 16.1 for his counterpart Philip Rivers of the Los Angeles Chargers, even though Smith had a higher completion rate (16/21 vs. 20/40), a better average per completion (7.8 yds vs. 5.9), a far superior TD/int ratio (2-0 vs. 0-3), and won the game handily 24-10."

 

 

 

Edited October 18, 2019 by WideNine

[WideNine]

2 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Sure, maybe two or three percent of plays will be right on the line, as far as accurate. Hard to call. The vast majority, though, could be agreed on by most reasonable people.

 

And nearly every NFL team buys PFF's data. They wouldn't do that if PFF wasn't damn good at what they do.

 

Apparently Beane was not buying their evaluation of QB's prior to the 2018 draft as PFFs Analysis Team ranking of the 2018 QB draft class went like this:

1. Baker Mayfield

2. Will Grier

3. Mason Rudolph

4. Lamar Jackson

5. Josh Rosen

6. Mike White

7. Jake Browning

8. Luke Falk

9. Auston Allen

10. Jerrett Stidham

11. Daniel Jones

12. Sam Darnold

13. Josh Allen

 

Not that I am saying folks may have a bias, but wouldn't you just look plain silly if the guy you have ranked dead last became good? Not that many NFL teams seemed to be listening to their player evaluations prior to the draft.Though they did get Mayfield right, but heck half our board predicted that and don't claim to be experts with all the secret sauce formulas to back up the educated guesswork needed to predict what QB the Browns would take.

 

Plenty of other metrics have merit and may be leveraged - situational statistics that help teams crunch probabilities for down and distance what a team is most likely to do offensively or defensively. It is the application of those collected metrics that help teams put a thumb on the probability scale and come up with game plans. That is why most teams have an analytics guy and it may be easier to buy the raw data collected by a group like PFF than to create your own.

 

They have data, and they have opinions. I will go out on a limb and say that the Bills and other NFL teams are most likely interested in the data they collect and not so much their opinions, interpretations, and player evaluations.

 

 

Edited October 18, 2019 by WideNine

[billsbackto81]

7 hours ago, BillsFanForReal said:

People actually subscribe and pay for this type of garbage?

[DCOrange]

12 hours ago, CincyBillsFan said:

 

And Winston, Mariota and Mayfield are?

 

 

Just to be clear, you realize that PFF says those three are bad as well, right?

[D. L. Hot-Flamethrower]

9 hours ago, Bangarang said:

Are these the same people that consider QB rating a controversial stat or the ones that hate on PFF in one thread but accept their conclusion in another when it’s what they want to hear?

 

Dude, this isn't about the last word, just take the L and put in the pile with all the others.

[Don Otreply]

10 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

Oh, I think he's going to be great.   I'm a huge fan of his.  

 

But anyone who thinks he's playing like a top 20 quarterback isn't watching.   He has a long way to go.   Having said that, I think we will see a much better QB in the coming weeks.  

This^^ and I agreed. Josh is a work in progress, let’s not forget that he was and is considered to be well behind in quality coaching throughout his college years, at this point imo he has one year of real QB training under his belt, but he is showing why he was considered a top ten pick. 

 

Go bills!!!

[GunnerBill]

Oh great it is a we hate PFF thread!

 

We haven't had one of those in at least two weeks.

[oldmanfan]

I reviewed some articles on line about this PFF group.  Teams seem to buy their information not for the scores they come up with, but for the amount of film they generate so that teams can use the film for their own analysis.  There was one article with Belichick, where he comments on the PFF approach. Simply put, his criticism (and it pretty much matches that of other critics) is that without knowing the play call, and the specific assignment for an individual player on that play call, it's pointless totry and grade a player on a specific play.

 

Since this is about QBs' it becomes even more complex.  Take the whole accuracy thing.  Apparently Allen is getting criticized for only having perfect accuracy (which is really precision, but I won't go into that again) by these pff guys.  here's the deal on that:  the only way you can truly judge whether a throw is put exactly where a QB wants it, is to be in the QB's head when he throws so you know what the exact target is that he wants to hit.  A QB may make a throw to the exact spot he wants, but the WR doesn't get to the spot in time, or the QB didn't read the pattern correctly.  And so on.

 

So to me teams can and do buy their product, but I really doubt they buy it because they feel these ratings per play mean anything. 

[eball]

[r00tabaga]

7 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

I reviewed some articles on line about this PFF group.  Teams seem to buy their information not for the scores they come up with, but for the amount of film they generate so that teams can use the film for their own analysis.  There was one article with Belichick, where he comments on the PFF approach. Simply put, his criticism (and it pretty much matches that of other critics) is that without knowing the play call, and the specific assignment for an individual player on that play call, it's pointless totry and grade a player on a specific play.

 

Since this is about QBs' it becomes even more complex.  Take the whole accuracy thing.  Apparently Allen is getting criticized for only having perfect accuracy (which is really precision, but I won't go into that again) by these pff guys.  here's the deal on that:  the only way you can truly judge whether a throw is put exactly where a QB wants it, is to be in the QB's head when he throws so you know what the exact target is that he wants to hit.  A QB may make a throw to the exact spot he wants, but the WR doesn't get to the spot in time, or the QB didn't read the pattern correctly.  And so on.

 

So to me teams can and do buy their product, but I really doubt they buy it because they feel these ratings per play mean anything. 

They have the Titans ahead of the Bills on their power rankings through week 7 that should tell you everything you need to know.

 

#19th actually ROTFL

[Tisker A Tasker]

welp, looks like I hate PFF now.

[RememberTheRockpile]

17 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

So to me teams can and do buy their product, but I really doubt they buy it because they feel these ratings per play mean anything. 

 

The assumption is that the product the teams buy is the same product they offer to the consumer. This is just naive. 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

10 hours ago, Bangarang said:

Are these the same people that consider QB rating a controversial stat or the ones that hate on PFF in one thread but accept their conclusion in another when it’s what they want to hear?

 

 

More likely they're the ones who respond to that other thread "yeah, but that's PFF - they had Tyrod Taylor as 9th in their QB rating in 2015.  We gotta take them with a big sack o' salt"

 

3 minutes ago, Tisker A Tasker said:

welp, looks like I hate PFF now.

 

You don't have to hate 'em, but you got to look at their whole picture and get out the salt shaker.  If they have a list of QB, look at their list of QB and say "how does that match what I see?"  "how does that match with conventional stats like passer rating?" etc etc.

 

2 minutes ago, RememberTheRockpile said:

The assumption is that the product the teams buy is the same product they offer to the consumer. This is just naive. 

 

PFF assembles all sorts of 'analytics' type stats, breakdowns of team and player performance by down and distance, QB performance at different distance and to different areas of the field etc.  This is likely the stuff teams purchase both to self-scout and to scout their opponent - not PFF's OL performance ratings or their QB ratings that they market to the fantasy fans.

[oldmanfan]

4 minutes ago, RememberTheRockpile said:

 

The assumption is that the product the teams buy is the same product they offer to the consumer. This is just neive. 

Quite true.

[JaCrispy]

14 hours ago, mykidsdad said:

They want JA to be bad. If he isn't they lose a lot of credibility and even money, because teams are using their metrics to pick players.

Yup...and that is what they call “fake news” ?

[colin]

my issues w PFF are:

 

their model is not predictive.  It just doesn't tell us who is going to play well and lead their team to wins next season.  tyrod being ranked high on what in retrospect was a perfectly optimized O for him is a great example.  they might have consistently great qbs ranked consistently high, but so does every fan who just watches the games, or just sees the QB stats.

 

they seem to err on the side of "do no harm", tyrod vs josh allen shows us that.  tyrod is physically or psychologically incapable of making a play in most circumstances.  him never winning when down by like 7 at the half or ever down by 1 point in the 4th is pretty shocking.  if you remember the jaxonville playoff game, he contributed basically zero all game.  making mistakes hurts, and josh has made just idiotic mistakes, but the ability to make plays while also making mistakes is more important than the absence of mistakes.

 

the models they use require data integrity which isn't possible.  these guys with their adjustments for 100% on the mark, and however the rate each individual player at different positions is basically un-falsifiable guesses that they jam in there.

 

If their metrics don't related to how players are bid for in free agency (where they have some OG ranked as like 2nd and he signs a small contract, while some guy they have as 65th gets a big ol wad of cash) over a large number of players, either they are the only people on the planet who actually understand pro football, or the GM's and coaches in the NFL disprove their rankings.

 

im much more interested in team statistics, which are more meaningful and are predictive.   

[Mango]

8 hours ago, WideNine said:

 

Apparently Beane was not buying their evaluation of QB's prior to the 2018 draft as PFFs Analysis Team ranking of the 2018 QB draft class went like this:

1. Baker Mayfield

2. Will Grier

3. Mason Rudolph

4. Lamar Jackson

5. Josh Rosen

6. Mike White

7. Jake Browning

8. Luke Falk

9. Auston Allen

10. Jerrett Stidham

11. Daniel Jones

12. Sam Darnold

13. Josh Allen

 

Not that I am saying folks may have a bias, but wouldn't you just look plain silly if the guy you have ranked dead last became good? Not that many NFL teams seemed to be listening to their player evaluations prior to the draft.Though they did get Mayfield right, but heck half our board predicted that and don't claim to be experts with all the secret sauce formulas to back up the educated guesswork needed to predict what QB the Browns would take.

 

Plenty of other metrics have merit and may be leveraged - situational statistics that help teams crunch probabilities for down and distance what a team is most likely to do offensively or defensively. It is the application of those collected metrics that help teams put a thumb on the probability scale and come up with game plans. That is why most teams have an analytics guy and it may be easier to buy the raw data collected by a group like PFF than to create your own.

 

They have data, and they have opinions. I will go out on a limb and say that the Bills and other NFL teams are most likely interested in the data they collect and not so much their opinions, interpretations, and player evaluations.

 

 

 

I am just here to stop the fake news. That isn't their QB ranking for the QB's. No only was Sam Darnold not their #12 QB....he was their #2 prospect in the entire draft, regardless of position. 

 

https://www.pff.com/news/draft-pff-big-board-top-250-players-for-the-2018-nfl-draft

 

I know it blasphemy on this board. But while Allen has improved, I am still not impressed or convinced he is the answer at QB yet. He could be, but he still looks a ways off to my eye. Allen hasn't played well enough for us to be 2-3 if we had say, the SEA or HOU defense. That doesn't mean I hate the guy, or root for him to fail. Just an honest interpretation thus far. 

That said, he might be the most exciting player in the league at the position....that doesn't make him good at it. 

[wiley16350]

I think the main problem with PFF is that they don't credit QB's enough with the simple passes.  For that reason, guys like Mariota and Tyrod Taylor get a little over rated and a guy like Allen gets under rated.  Allen has been pretty good in the short to intermediate range but has struggled more with the deep ball and having too many turnovers.  The intermediate range is truly what shows a QB's potential and that's where Allen has been much better than some of the guys above him.  One guy that I clearly think shouldn't be above Allen is Mariota.  I have done 3 of his games and 3 of Allen's games and Allen has a 102+ rating from me while Mariota is in the 70's.  To be fair, I haven't done Allen's game against the Patriots, which was his worst.  I also haven't done the game against the Titans which was seemingly bad for Mariota and good for Allen.  I don't see how Mariota would be considered better than Allen.  Mariota and Tyrod are perfect example of why the simple passes matter.  Those guys take too many sacks when simple plays are available to them.  I actually find that Allen has avoided a lot of sacks in a multitude of ways.  Believe it or not, there have been sacks he has avoided by getting rid of the ball quickly.  He has also done it by breaking tackles, leaving the pocket at the right time and throwing the ball away.  I wish I could keep up with the season in my grading but it takes a lot of time.  There are definite questions on this list.  I've done 3 of Mayfield's games and he wasn't as high as Allen but the New England game could be a big weight for Allen I guess.  I question how high Darnold is, he has only played 2 games and he wasn't that good against the Bills.  Ryan Fitzpatrick has been much better than his numbers but I don't think I have him better than Allen.  Winston has had a couple of really good games but also a couple of really bad ones, I find him to be questionable too.

[Happy Days Lois & Clark]

Josh Allen needs to improve on his TD to INT ratio. He also fumbles too often.

[voodoo poonani]

Nick and Nolan discuss metrics

Edited October 18, 2019 by voodoo poonani

[mykidsdad]

1 hour ago, Don Otreply said:

This^^ and I agreed. Josh is a work in progress, let’s not forget that he was and is considered to be well behind in quality coaching throughout his college years, at this point imo he has one year of real QB training under his belt, but he is showing why he was considered a top ten pick. 

 

Go bills!!!

 

Agreed. Josh is in a way entering his rookie year this game. As we all know Josh went to Wyoming which may have less talent than some Div 2 Schools. It is one thing to come out of a small school and conference as a non QB, but as a QB? There was and is a crazy huge learning curve. With the lack of quality college experience Josh had, we are really only now starting to see what he would look like as a Rookie.

[JoshAllenHasBigHands]

5 minutes ago, ScottLaw said:

Yep. Guy has a very long way to go to prove he will be a starting QB in this league for the long haul..... I think Darnold is already there.

 

ScottLaw, you aren't a special poster because you think Allen has a long way to go. No. What makes you standout is your corresponding opinion that Darnold is already there. If that isn't next level trolling, I don't know what is. Props for being great at what you do. 

[Stank_Nasty]

8 minutes ago, ScottLaw said:

Yep. Guy has a very long way to go to prove he will be a starting QB in this league for the long haul..... I think Darnold is already there.

 

1 minute ago, JoshAllenHasBigHands said:

 

ScottLaw, you aren't a special poster because you think Allen has a long way to go. No. What makes you standout is your corresponding opinion that Darnold is already there. If that isn't next level trolling, I don't know what is. Props for being great at what you do. 

yup. i was just about to ask what in the world he's seen from darnold, CONSISTENTLY, that he could make such a premature proclamation. 

 

as far as this year goes its crazy, after one solid game, how fast people forget he looked completely overwhelmed against a good defense in week 1. allen was head and shoulders the better qb that day.

[mykidsdad]

I can't believe the blatant contempt PFF has for Buffalo putting a 4-1 team at 20. The Titans are 19 on their list, and they have Denver 17. Does their whole organization exist to troll Buffalo? I think the ax they have to grind about Josh is really a thing. Wow.

 

https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-week-7-power-rankings